Note: Many of the
following quotations were obtained from the writings of Ahmed Deedat although
many other sources were used as well. Since there are over 40 different
VERSIONS of the Bible, you will found contradictions in one Bible but you may
not find the same contradictions in another version of the Bible. This
happened to me at the Library. Man, the Scholars are working
hard.

"Then woe to those
who write the book with their own hands and then say: 'This is from Allah', to
traffic with it for a miserable price. Woe to them for what their hands do
write and for the gain they make thereby" Qur'an
Al-Bakarah(2:79)

"And when there
came to them a messenger from Allah, Confirming what was with them, a party of
the people of the book threw away the book of Allah behind their backs as if
(it had been something) they did not know" Qur'an
Al-Bakarah(2:101)

"Ye shall not add
unto the word which I (God) command you, neither shall ye diminish [ought]
from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I
command you." Deuteronomy 4:2

Let us start from the
beginning. No Biblical scholar on this earth will claim that the Bible was
written by Jesus
himself. They all agree that the Bible was written after the departure of
Jesus peace be upon him by is followers.

"..Yes, the Bible
is human, although some out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have
denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in
the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and bear in their style
the characteristics of men...." in "It is Human,
Yet Divine" by W Graham Scroggie, p.
17

"...Not so the New testament...There is condensation and
editing; there is choice reproduction and witness. The Gospels have come
through the mind of the church behind the authors. They represent experience
and history..." in "The Call of the Minaret,"
Kenneth Cragg, p 277

"It is well
known that the primitive Christian Gospel was initially transmitted by word of
mouth and that this oral tradition resulted in variant reporting of word and
deed. It is equally true that when the Christian record was committed to
writing it continued to be the subject of verbal variation. Involuntary and
intentional, at the hands of scribes and editors" Peake's Commentary
on the Bible, p. 633

"Yet, as a matter of fact,
every book of the New Testament with the exception of the four great Epistles
of St. Paul is at present more or less the subject of controversy, and
interpolations are asserted even in these." Encyclopedia
Brittanica, 12th Ed. Vol. 3, p. 643

Dr. Lobegott Friedrich
Konstantin Von Tischendorf, one of the most adamant conservative Christian
defenders of the Trinity was himself driven to admit that:

"[the New Testament
had] in many passages undergone such serious modification of meaning as to
leave us in painful uncertainty as to what the Apostles had actually written"
Secrets of Mount Sinai, James Bentley, p.
117

After listing many examples of
contradictory statements in the Bible, Dr. Frederic Kenyon
says:

"Besides the larger
discrepancies, such as these, there is scarcely a verse in which there is not
some variation of phrase in some copies [of the ancient manuscripts from which
the Bible has been collected]. No one can say that these additions or
omissions or alterations are matters of mere indifference" in Our Bible and the Ancient Manuscripts, Dr. Frederic Kenyon,
Eyre and Spottiswoode, p. 3

Throughout this page you will find countless other
similar quotations from some of Christendom's leading scholars. Let us suffice
with these for now.

Christians are, in general, good and
decent people, and the stronger their convictions the more decent they are.
This is attested to in the noble Qur'an: "...and
nearest among them (men) in love to the believers will you find those who say
'we are Christians': because amongst these are men devoted to learning and men
who have renounced the world, and they are not arrogant. And when they listen
to the revelation received by the messenger (Muhammad), you will see their
eyes overflowing with tears for they recognize the truth: They pray: 'Our
Lord! we believe; write us down among the witnesses'." The noble Qur'an,
Al-Maidah(5):82-83.

All biblical "versions" of the Bible prior
to the revised version of 1881 were dependent upon the "Ancient Copies" (those
dating between five to six hundred years after Jesus). The revisers of the
Revised Standard Version (RSV) 1952 were the first biblical scholars to have
access to the "MOST ancient copies" which date fully three to four hundred
years after Christ. It is only logical for us to concur that the closer a
document is to the source the more authentic it is.

Let us see what is the opinion of
Christendom with regard to the most revised version of the Bible (revised in
1952 and then again in 1971):

"The finest version
which has been produced in the present century"- (Church of England
newspaper)

"The well loved
characteristics of the authorized version combined with a new accuracy of
translation" - (Life and Work)

"The most accurate and
close rendering of the original"- (The
Times)

The publishers themselves (Collins)
mention on page 10 of their notes: "This Bible (RSV) is
the product of thirty two scholars assisted by an advisory committee
representing fifty cooperating denominations"

Let us see what these 32 Christian
scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating Christian
denominations have to say about the Authorized Version (AV), or as it is
better known, the King James Version (KJV). In the preface of the RSV
1971 we find the following: "...Yet the King James
Version has GRAVE DEFECTS.." They go on to caution us that: "...That these defects are SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS as to call for
revision"

The Jehovah's Witnesses in their
"AWAKE" Magazine dated 8th September 1957 published the following
headline: "50,000 Errors in the Bible" wherein they say "..there are probably 50,000 errors in the Bible...errors which
have crept into the Bible text...50,000 such serious
errors..."

After all of this, however, they go on to
say: "...as a whole the Bible is accurate."

Let us have a look at only a very few of these
errors.

In John 3:16 - AV (KJV) we read:
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only
begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life.."

But as seen in section 1.2.3.10, this
fabrication "begotten" has now been unceremoniously excised by these most
eminent of Bible revisers. However, humanity did not have to wait 2000 years
for this revelation.

In Maryam (19):88-98 of the noble
Qur'an we read: "And they say 'Allah Most Compassionate
has begotten a son!'. Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous! The
skies are ready to burst (at such a claim), and the earth to split asunder,
and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin. That they should ascribe a son
to the Most Compassionate. But it is not befitting [the majesty of] the Most
Compassionate that He should beget a son. Not one of the beings in the heavens
and the earth but must come to the Most Compassionate as a servant. He has
taken account of all of them and has numbered them all exactly. And every one
of them will come to him singly on the day of judgment. On those who believe
and work deeds of righteousness, will Allah most gracious bestow love. Verily,
We have made this [Qur'an] easy in your tongue [O Muhammad] that you might
deliver glad tidings to those who seek refuge [in Allah] and warn with it a
people who are contentious. And how many a generation before them have we
destroyed! Can you find a single one of them or hear from them so much as a
whisper?"

In 1st Epistle of John 5:7 (King
James Version) we find: "For there are three that bear
record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three
are one."

As we have already seen in section
1.2.2.5, this verse is the closest approximation to what the Church calls the
holy Trinity. However, as seen in that section, this cornerstone of the
Christian faith has also been scrapped from the RSV by the same thirty two
Christian scholars of the highest eminence backed by fifty cooperating
Christian denominations, once again all according to the "most ancient
manuscripts."

And once again, we find that the noble
Qur'an revealed this truth over fourteen hundred years ago:

"O people of the book! commit no
excesses in your religion: nor say of Allah aught but the truth. Christ Jesus
the son of Mary was (no more than) a Messenger of Allah, and his Word, which
he bestowed upon Mary, and a spirit preceding from him so believe in Allah and
his messengers. Say not "Three" desist It will be better for you for Allah is
one God Glory be to him Far exalted is he above having a son. To him belong
all things in the heavens and the earth. And enough is Allah as a disposer of
affairs."The noble Qur'an, Al-Nissa(4):171

Prior to 1952 all versions of the Bible
made mention of one of the most miraculous events associated with the prophet
Jesus peace be upon him, that of his ascension into heaven: "So then the lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken
up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God"Mark 16:19
and once again in Luke: "While he blessed them, he
parted from them, and was carried up into heaven. And they worshipped him, and
returned to Jerusalem with great joy." Luke
24:51-52

In the 1952 RSV Mark 16 ends at verse
8 and the rest is relegated in small print to a footnote (more on this
later). Similarly, in the commentary on the verses of Luke 24, we are told in
the footnotes of the NRSV Bible "Other ancient authorities lack "and was
carried up into heaven'" and "Other ancient authorities lack 'and worshipped
him'".

Thus, we see that the verse of Luke in
it's original form only said: "While he blessed them, he
parted from them. And they returned to Jerusalem with great joy." It
took centuries of "inspired correction" to give us Luke 24:51-52 in
their current form.

As another example, in Luke 24:1-7
we read: "Now upon the first day of the week, very early
in the morning, they came unto the sepulcher, bringing the spices which they
had prepared, and certain others with them. And they found the stone rolled
away from the sepulcher. And they entered in, and found not the body of the
Lord Jesus. And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed thereabout,
behold, two men stood by them in shining garments: And as they were afraid,
and bowed down their faces to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye the
living among the dead? He is not here, but is risen: remember how he spake
unto you when he was yet in Galilee, saying, The Son of man must be delivered
into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third day rise
again."

Once again, in reference to verse 5, the
footnotes say: "Other ancient authorities lack 'He is not here but has risen'"
Also, please read entries 16 and 17 in the table in section
2.2.

The examples are far too numerous to list
here, however, you are encouraged to obtain a copy of the New Revised Standard
Version of the Bible for yourself and scan through the four gospels. You shall
be hard pressed to find even two consecutive pages that do not contain the
words "Other ancient authorities lack..." or "Other ancient authorities
add..." etc. in the footnotes..

Let us now talk about the alleged authors
of the New Testament. We will note that every Gospel begins with the
introduction "According to....." such as "The Gospel according to Saint
Matthew," "The Gospel according to Saint Luke," "The Gospel according to Saint
Mark," "The Gospel according to Saint John."

The obvious conclusion for the average man
on the street is that these people are known to be the authors of the books
attributed to them. This, however is not the case. Why? Because not one of
the vaunted four thousand copies existent carries its author's signature.
It has just been assumed that they were the authors. Recent discoveries,
however, refute this belief.

Even the internal evidence proves
that, for instance, Matthew did not write the Gospel attributed to him: "...And as Jesus passed forth thence, HE (Jesus) saw a man,
named Matthew, sitting at the receipt of custom: and HE (Jesus) saith unto HIM
(Matthew), follow ME (Jesus) and HE (Matthew) arose, and followed HIM
(Jesus)." Matthew 9:9

It does not take a rocket scientist to see
that neither Jesus nor Matthew wrote this verse of "Matthew." Such evidence
can be found in many places throughout the New Testament. Although many people
have hypothesized that it is possible that an author sometimes may write in
the third person, still, in light of the rest of the evidence that we shall
see throughout this book, there is simply too much evidence against this
hypothesis.

This observation is by no means limited to
the New Testament. There is even proof that at least parts of Deuteronomy were
neither written by God nor by Moses. This can be seen in Deuteronomy 34:5-10
where we read "So Moses....DIED... and he (God Almighty)
BURIED HIM (Moses)... He was 120 years old WHEN HE DIED... and there arose not
a prophet SINCE in Israel like unto Moses...."

Did Moses write his own obituary? Joshua
also speaks in detail about his own death in Joshua 24:29-33. The
evidence overwhelmingly supports the current recognition that most of the
books of the Bible were not written by their supposed
authors.

The authors of the RSV by Collins say that
the author of "Kings" is "Unknown." If they knew it to be the word of God they
would have undoubtedly attributed it to him. Rather, they have chosen to
honestly say "Author....Unknown." But if the author is unknown then why
attribute it to God? How can it then be claimed to have been "inspired"?
Continuing, we read that the book of Isaiah is "Mainly credited to Isaiah.
Parts may have been written by others." Ecclesiastics: "Author. Doubtful, but
commonly assigned to Solomon." Ruth: "Author. Not definitely known, perhaps
Samuel." and on and on.

Let us have a slightly more detailed look
at only one book of the New Testament: "The author of the Book of Hebrews
is unknown. Martin Luther suggested that Apollos was the author...Tertullian
said that Hebrews was a letter of Barnabas...Adolf Harnack and J. Rendel
Harris speculated that it was written by Priscilla (or Prisca). William Ramsey
suggested that it was done by Philip. However, the traditional position is
that the Apostle Paul wrote Hebrews...Eusebius believed that Paul wrote it,
but Origen was not positive of Pauline authorship."

From the introduction to the King James
Bible, New revised and updated sixth edition, (why must the revise a
Bible? Contradictions were found) the Hebrew/Greek Key Study, Red Letter
Edition.

Is this how we
define "inspired by God"?

As seen in chapter one, St. Paul and his
church after him, were responsible of making wholesale changes to the religion
of Jesus (pbuh) after his departure and were further responsible for mounting
a massive campaign of death and torture of all Christians who refused to
renounce the teachings of the apostles in favor of the Pauline doctrines. All
but the Gospels acceptable to the Pauline faith were then systematically
destroyed or re-written. Rev. Charles Anderson Scott has the following to
say:

"It is highly probable
that not one of the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, and Luke) was
inexistence in the form which we have it, prior to the death of Paul.
And were the documents to betaken in strict order of chronology, the Pauline
Epistles would come before the synoptic Gospels." in History of Christianity in the Light of Modern
Knowledge, Rev. Charles Anderson Scott, p.338

This statement is further confirmed by
Prof. Brandon: "The earliest Christian writings that have
been preserved for us are the letters of the apostle Paul" in "Religions in Ancient History,"S.G.F. Brandon,
p. 228.

In the latter part of the second century,
Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth says: "As the brethren
desired me to write epistles (letters), I did so, and these the apostles of the
devil have filled with tares (undesirable elements), exchanging some things
and adding others, for whom there is a woe reserved. It is not therefore, a
matter of wonder if some have also attempted to adulterate the sacred writings
of the Lord, since they have attempted the same in other works that are not to
be compared with these."

The Qur'an confirms this with the words:
"Then woe to those who write the book (of Allah/God) with
their own hands and then say: 'This is from Allah', to traffic with it for a
miserable price. Woe to them for what their hands do write and for the gain
they make thereby"The noble Qur'an
Al-Bakarah(2):79

Victor Tununensis, a sixth century
African Bishop related in his Chronicle (566 AD) that when Messala was
consul at Constantinople (506 AD), he "censored and corrected" the Gentile
Gospels written by persons considered illiterate by the Emperor Anastasius.
The implication was that they were altered to conform to sixth century
Christianity which differed from the Christianity of previous centuries
(The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the New Testament,
by M. A. Yusseff, p. 81)

(When the Dead Sea Scrolls were found (in
about the 50's) the church took over 40 years to publish the book for the
public. Why did it take them 40 years. If this was extracts from the Bible
many hundreds of years old than this could be a proff that the modern day
Bible is authentic. BUT, the Christian scholars must have found many
conflicting verses from the Dead Sea Scrolls and the modern Bible therefore it
took than over 40 years to Correct, Edit, Add, Delete and Manipulate many
verse's in the Dead Sea Scrolls so that it would agree with the modern day
Bibles.)

These "corrections" were by no means
confined to the first centuries after Christ. Sir Higgins says: "It is impossible to deny that the Bendictine Monks of St. Maur,
as far as Latin and Greek language went, were very learned and talented, as
well as numerous body of men. In Cleland's 'Life of Lanfranc, Archbishop of
Canterbury', is the following passage: 'Lanfranc, a Benedictine Monk,
Archbishop of Canterbury, having found the Scriptures much corrupted by
copyists, applied himself to correct them, as also the writings of the
fathers, agreeably to the orthodox faith, secundum fidem orthodoxam."
in "History of Christianity in the light of
Modern knowledge", Higgins p.318

In other words, the Christian scriptures
were re-written in order to conform to the doctrines of the eleventh and
twelfth centuries and even the writings of the early church fathers were
"corrected" so that the hanges would not be discovered. Sir Higgins goes on to
say: "The same Protestant divine has this remarkable
passage: 'Impartiality exacts from me the confession, that the orthodox have
in some places altered the Gospels."

The author then goes on to demonstrate how
a massive effort was undertaken in Constantinople, Rome, Canterbury, and the
Christian world in general in order to "correct" the Gospels and destroy all
manuscripts before this period.

Theodore Zahan, illustrated the bitter
conflicts within the established churches in Articles of the Apostolic
Creed. He points out that the Roman Catholics accuse the Greek Orthodox
Church of remodeling the text of the holy scriptures by additions and
omissions with both good as well as evil intentions. The Greek Orthodox, on
the other hand, accuse the Roman Catholics of straying in many places very far
away from the original text. In spite of their differences, they both join
forces to condemn the non-conformist Christians of deviating from "the true
way" and condemn them as heretics. The heretics in turn condemn the Catholics
for having "recoined the truth like forgers." The author concludes "Do not
facts support these accusations?"

"And from those who
said: "We are Christians," We took their Covenant, but they forgot a good part
of the message which was sent to them. Therefore We have stirred up enmity and
hatred among them till the Day of Resurrection, and Allah will inform them of
what they used to do. O people of the Scripture! Now has Our messenger
(Muhammad) come to you, explaining to you much of that which you used to hide
in the Scripture, and forgiving much. Indeed, there has come to you a light
from Allah and a plain Scripture. Wherewith Allah guides him who seeks His
good pleasure unto paths of peace. He brings them out of darkness by His will
into light, and guides them to a straight path. They indeed have disbelieved
who say: Lo! Allah is the Messiah, son of Mary. Say: Who then has the least
power against Allah, if He had willed to destroy the Messiah son of Mary, and
his mother and everyone on earth? And to Allah belongs the dominion of the
heavens and the earth and all that is between them. He creates what He will.
And Allah is Able to do all things. The Jews and Christians say: We are sons
of Allah and His loved ones. Say; Why then does He punish you for your sins?
No, you are but mortals of His creating. He forgives whom He will, and
punishes whom He will. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and
the earth and all that is between them, and unto Him is the return (of all). O
people of the Scripture! Now has Our messenger (Muhammad) come unto you to
make things plain after a break in (the series of) the messengers, lest you
should say: There came not unto us a messenger of cheer nor any Warner. Now
has a messenger of cheer and a Warner come unto you. And Allah is Able to do
all things." The noble Qur'an,
Al-Maidah(5):14-19

St. Augustine himself, a man
acknowledged and looked up to by both Protestants and Catholics alike,
professed that there were secret doctrines in the Christian religion and that
"there were many things true in the Christian religion
which it was not convenient for the vulgar to know, and that some things were
false, but convenient for the vulgar to believe in
them."

Sir Higgins admits: "It is not unfair to suppose that in these withheld truths we
have part of the modern Christian mysteries, and I think it will hardly be
denied that the church, whose highest authorities held such doctrines, would
not scruple to retouch the sacred writings" (The
Dead Sea Scrolls, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the New Testament, M.
A. Yusseff, p.83)

Even the epistles attributed to Paul were
not written by him. After years of research, Catholics and Protestants alike
agree that of the thirteen epistles attributed to Paul only seven are
genuinely his. They are: Romans, 1, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Philipians,
Philemon, and 1 Thessalonians.

Christian sect are not even agreed on the
definition of what exactly is an "inspired" book of God. The Protestants are
taught that there are 66 truly "inspired" books in the Bible, while the
Catholics have been taught that there are 73 truly "inspired" books,
not to mention the many other sects and their "newer" books, such as the
Mormons, etc. As we shall see shortly, the very first Christians, for many
generations, did not follow either the 66 books of the Protestants, nor the 73
books of the Catholics. Quite the opposite, they believed in books that were,
many generations later, "recognized" to be fabrications and apocrypha by a
more enlightened age than that of the apostles.

Well, where do all of these Bibles come
from and why the difficulty in defining what is a truly "inspired" word of
God? They come from the "ancient manuscripts" (also known as MSS). The
Christian world today boasts of an excess of 24,000 "ancient manuscripts" of
the Bible dating all the way back to the fourth century after Christ (But not
back to Christ or the apostles themselves). In other words, we have with us
gospels which date back to the century when the Trinitarians took over the
Christian Church. All manuscripts from before this period have strangely
perished. All Bibles in existence today are compiled from these "ancient
manuscripts." Any scholar of the Bible will tell us that no two ancient
manuscripts are exactly identical.

People today generally believe that there
is only ONE Bible, and ONE version of any given verse of the Bible. This is
far from true. All Bibles in our possession today (Such as the KJV, the
NRSV, the NAB, NIV,...etc.) are the result of extensive cutting and pasting
from these various manuscripts with no single one being the definitive
reference. There are countless cases where a paragraph shows up in one
"ancient manuscript" but is totally missing from many others. For instance,
Mark 16:8-20 (twelve whole verses) is completely missing from the most ancient
manuscripts available today (such as the Sinaitic Manuscript, the Vatican
#1209 and the Armenian version) but shows up in more recent "ancient
manuscripts."

There are also many documented cases where
even geographical locations are completely different from one ancient
manuscript to the next. For instance, in the "Samaritan Pentateuch
manuscript," Deuteronomy 27:4 speaks of "mount Gerizim," while in the "Hebrew
manuscript" the exact same verse speaks of "mount Ebal." From Deuteronomy
27:12-13 we can see that these are two distinctly different locations.
Similarly, Luke 4:44 in some "ancient manuscripts" mentions "Synagogues of
Judea," others mention "Synagogues of Galilee."

This is only a sampling, a comprehensive
listing would require a book of it's own.

There are countless examples in the Bible
where verses of a questionable nature are included in the text without any
disclaimer telling the reader that many scholars and translators have serious
reservations as to their authenticity. The King James Version of the Bible
(Also known as the "Authorized Version"), the one in the hands of the majority
of Christendom today, is one of the most notorious in this regard. It gives
the reader absolutely no clue as to the questionable nature of such verses.
However, more recent translations of the Bible are now beginning to be a
little more honest and forthcoming in this regard.

For example, the New Revised Standard
Version of the Bible, by Oxford Press, has adopted an extremely subtle system
of bracketing the most glaring examples of such questionable verses
with double square brackets ([[ ]]). It is highly unlikely that the casual
reader will realize the true function these brackets serve. They are there to
tell the informed reader that the enclosed verses are of a highly questionable
nature. Examples of this are the story of the "woman taken in adultery" in
John 8:1-11, as well as Mark 16:9-20 (Jesus' resurrection and return), and
Luke 23:34 (which, interestingly enough, is there to confirm the prophesy of
Isaiah 53:12).....and so forth.

For example, with regard to John
8:1-11, the commentators of this Bible say in very small print at the
bottom of the page: "The most ancient authorities lack
7.53-8.11; other authorities add the passage here or after 7.36 or after 21.25
or after Luke 21.38 with variations of text; some mark the text as doubtful."
(emphasis added).

With regard to Mark 16:9-20, we
are, strangely enough, given a choice of how we would like the Gospel of Mark
to end. The commentators have supplied both a "short ending" and a "long
ending." Thus, we are given a choice of what we would prefer to be the
"inspired word of God".

Once again, at the end of this Gospel in
very small text, the commentators say: "Some of the
most ancient authorities bring the book to a close at the end of verse 8. One
authority concludes the book with the shorter ending; others include the
shorter ending and then continue with verses 9-20. In most authorities, verses
9-20 follow immediately after verse 8, though in some of these authorities the
passage is marked as being doubtful."

Peake's Commentary
on the Bible records;

"It is now generally
agreed that 9-20 are not an original part of Mk. They are not found in the
oldest MSS, and indeed were apparently not in the copies used by Mt. and Lk. A
10th-cent. Armenian MS ascribes the passage to Aristion, the presbyter
mentioned by Papias (ap.Eus.HE III, xxxix, 15)."

"Indeed an Armenian
translation of St. Mark has quite recently been discovered, in which the last
twelve verses of St. Mark are ascribed to Ariston, who is otherwise known as
one of the earliest of the Christian Fathers; and it is quite possible that
this tradition is correct" Our Bible and the Ancient
Manuscripts, F. Kenyon, Eyre and Spottiswoode, pp. 7-8

Even at that, these verses are noted as
having been narrated differently in different "authorities." For example,
verse 14 is claimed by the commentators to have the following words added on
to them in some "ancient authorities": "and they excused themselves saying
'This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the
truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits.
Therefore, reveal your righteousness now' - thus they spoke to Christ and
Christ replied to them 'The term of years of Satan's power has been fulfilled,
but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was
handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, that
they may inherit the spiritual and imperishable glory of the righteousness
that is in heaven'.".

Dr. Lobegott Friedrich Konstantin Von
Tischendorf was one of the most eminent conservative biblical scholars of
the nineteenth century. He was also one of the staunchest most adamant
defenders of the "Trinity" history has known. One of his greatest lifelong
achievements was the discovery of the oldest known Biblical manuscript know to
mankind, the "Codex Sinaiticus," from Saint Catherine's Monasteryin Mount
Sinai.

One of the most devastating discoveries made from the
study of this fourth century manuscript was that the gospel of Mark
originally ended at verses 16:8 and not at verse 16:20 as it does today.
In other words, the last 12 verses (Mark 16:9 through Mark 16:20) were
"injected" by the church into the Bible sometime after the 4th century.
Clement of Alexandria and Origen never quoted these verses.

Later
on, it was also discovered that the said 12 verses, wherein lies the
account of "the resurrection of Jesus," do not appear in codices Syriacus,
Vaticanus and Bobiensis. Originally, the "Gospel of Mark" contained no
mention of the "resurrection of Jesus" (Mark 16:9-20). At least four hundred
years (if not more) after the departure of Jesus, the Church received divine
"inspiration" to add the story of the resurrection to the end of this
Gospel.

The author of "Codex Sinaiticus" had no
doubt that the Gospel of Mark came to an end at Mark 16:8, to emphasize this
point we find that immediately following this verse he brings the text to a
close with a fine artistic squiggle and the words "The Gospel according to
Mark."

Tischendorf was a staunch conservative
Christian and as such he managed to casually brush this discrepancy aside
since in his estimation the fact that Mark was not an apostle nor an eye
witness to the ministry of Jesus made his account secondary to those of the
apostles such as Matthew and John. However, as seen elsewhere in this book,
the majority of Christian scholars today recognize the writings of Paul to be
the oldest of the writings of the Bible. These are closely followed by the
"Gospel of Mark" and the "Gospels of Matthew and Luke" are almost universally
recognized to have been based upon the "Gospel of Mark." This discovery was
the result of centuries of detailed and painstaking studies by these Christian
scholars and the details can not be repeated here. Suffice it to say that most
reputable Christian scholars today recognize this as a basic indisputable
fact.

Today, the translators and publishers of
our modern Bibles are beginning to be a little more forthright and honest with
their readers. Although they may not simply openly admit that these twelve
verses were forgeries of the Church and not the word of God, still, at least
they are beginning to draw the reader's attention to the fact that there are
two "versions" of the "Gospel of Mark" and then leave the reader to decide
what to make of these two "versions."

Now the question becomes "if the Church
has tampered with the Gospel of Mark, then did they stop there or is there
more to this story?"

As it happens, Tischendorf also
discovered that the "Gospel of John" has been heavily reworked by the
Church over the ages. For example,

1. It was found that the
verses starting from John 7:53 to 8:11 (the story of the woman taken in
adultery) are not to be found in the most ancient copies of the Bible
available to Christianity today, specifically, codices Sinaiticus or
Vaticanus.

2. It was also found that
John 21:25 was a later insertion, and that a verse from the gospel of Luke
(24:12) that speaks of Peter discovering an empty tomb of Jesus is not to be
found in the ancient manuscripts.

(For more on this topic please read
'Secrets of Mount Sinai' by James Bentley, Doubleday, NY,
1985).

Much of the discoveries of Dr.
Tischendorf regarding the continuous and unrelenting tampering with the text of
the Bible over the ages has been verified by twentieth century science. For
example, a study of the Codex Sinaiticus under ultraviolet light has
revealed that the "Gospel of John" originally ended at verse 21:24 and was
followed by a small tail piece and then the words "The Gospel according to
John." However, some time later, a completely different "inspired" individual
took pen in hand, erased the text following verse 24, and then added in the
"inspired" text of John 21:25 which we find in our Bibles
today.

The evidence of tampering goes on and on.
For example, in the Codex Sinaiticus the "lord's prayer" of Luke 11:2-4 differs
substantially from the version which has reached us through the agency of
centuries of "inspired" correction. Luke 11:2-4 in this most ancient of
all Christian manuscripts reads:

"Father, Hallowed by thy name, Thy
kingdom come. Thy will be done, as in heaven, so upon earth. Give us day by
day our daily bread. And forgive us our sins, as we ourselves also forgive
everyone that is indebted to us. And bring us not into
temptation."

Further, the "Codex Vaticanus," is another
ancient manuscript held by the scholars of Christianity in the same reverent
standing as the Codex Sinaiticus. These two fourth century codices are
together considered the most ancient copies of the Bible available today. In
the codex Vaticanus we can find a version of Luke 11:2-4 even shorter than
that of Codex Sinaiticus. In this version even the words "Thy will be done, as
in heaven, so upon earth." are not to be
found.

Well, what has been the official Church
position regarding these "discrepancies"? How did the Church decide to handle
this situation? Did they call upon all of the foremost scholars of Christian
literature to come together in a mass conference in order to jointly study the
most ancient Christian manuscripts available to the Church and come to a
common agreement as to what was the true original word of God?
No!

Well then, did they immediately expend
every effort to make mass copies of the original manuscripts and send them out
to the Christian world so that they could make their own decisions as to what
truly was the original unchanged word of God? Once again,
No!

So what did they do? Let us ask Rev. Dr.
George L. Robertson.

In his book "Where did we get our
Bible?" he writes: "Of the MSS. of Holy Scripture in
Greek still existing there are said to be several thousand of varying worth
... Three or four in particular of these old, faded out, and unattractive
documents constitute the most ancient and the most precious treasures of the
Christian Church, and are therefore of special
interest."

First in Rev. Richardson's list is the
"Codex Vaticanus" of which he says: "This is probably the most ancient of
all Greek MSS. now known to exist. It is designated as Codex 'B.' In 1448,
Pope Nicholas V brought it to Rome where it has lain practically ever since,
being guarded assiduously by papal officials in the Vatican Library. It's
history is brief: Erasmus in 1533 knew of its existence, but neither he nor
any of his successors were permitted to study it... becoming quite
inaccessible to scholars, till Tischendorfin 1843, after months of delay, was
finally allowed to see it for six hours.

"Another specialist, named de Muralt in
1844 was likewise given an aggravating glimpse of it for nine hours. The story
of how Dr. Tregelles in 1845 was allowed by the authorities (all unconscious
to themselves) to secure it page by page through memorizing the text, is a
fascinating one. Dr. Tregelles did it. He was permitted to study the MS.
continuously for a long time, but not to touch it or to take
notes.

"Indeed, every day as he entered the
room where the precious document was guarded, his pockets were searched and
pen, paper and ink were taken from him, if he carried such accessories with
him. The permission to enter, however, was repeated, until he finally had
carried away with him and annotated in his room most of the principle variant
readings of this most ancient text. Often, however, in the process, if the
papal authorities observed he was becoming too much absorbed in any one
section, they would snatch the MS. away from him and direct his attention to
another leaf. Eventually they discovered that Tregelles had practically stolen
the text, and that the Biblical world knew the secrets of their historic
MS.

"Accordingly, Pope Pius IX ordered that
it should be photographed and published; and it was, in five volumes which
appeared in 1857. But the work was very unsatisfactorily done. About that time
Tischendorf made a third attempt to gain access to and examine it. He
succeeded, and later issued the text of the first twenty
pages.

"Finally in 1889-90, with papal
permission, the entire text was photographed and issued in facsimile, and
published so that a copy of the expensive quartos was obtainable by, and is
now in the possession of all the principle libraries in the biblical world."
in "Where did we get our Bible?", Rev. Dr. George L. Robertson.
Harper and Brothers Publishers, pp.110-112

What were all of the Popes afraid of?
What was the Vatican as a whole afraid of? Why was the concept of
releasing the text of their most ancient copy of the Bible to the general
public so terrifying to them? Why did they feel it necessary to bury the most
ancient copies of the inspired word of God in a dark corner of the Vatican
never to be seen by outside eyes? Why? What about all of the thousands upon
thousands of other manuscripts which to this day remain buried in the darkest
depths of the Vatican vaults never to be seen or studied by the general masses
of Christendom?

"[And remember] When
God took a Covenant from those who were given the Scripture: You shall make it
known and clear to mankind, and you shall not to hide it; but they flung it
behind their backs, and purchased with it a miserable gain! How evil was that
which they purchased!" The noble Qur'an,
A'al-Umran(3):187

"Say: 'O people of the
Book! exceed not in your religion the bounds [of what is proper], trespassing
beyond the truth, nor follow the vain desires of people who went astray in
times gone by, who misled many, and strayed [themselves] from the straight
path.'" The noble Qur'an,
Al-Maida(5):77

Returning to our study of some of the
"discrepancies" to be found between our modern Bibles and between the most
ancient copies of the Bible available to the chosen few, we find that the
verse of Luke 24:51 contains Luke's alleged account of the final
parting of Jesus (pbuh) and how he was "raised up into heaven." However, as
seen in previous pages, in the Codex Sinaiticus and other ancient manuscripts
the words "and was carried up into heaven" are completely missing. The verse
only says: "And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from
them."

C.S.C. Williams observed, if this omission
were correct, "there is no reference at all to the Ascension in the original
text of the Gospel."

Some other "inspired" modification of the
Church to Codex Sinaiticus and our modern Bibles: Matthew 17:21 is missing
in Codex Sinaiticus.

In our modern Bibles, Mark 1:1
reads "The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God;" however,
in this most ancient of all Christian manuscripts, this verse only reads
"The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ"

Strangely, the very words which are most
grating to the Muslim's Qur'an, "the Son of God," are completely missing.
Isn't that interesting?

The words of Jesus in Luke 9:55-56
are missing.

The original text of Matthew 8:2 as
found in Codex Sinaiticus tells us that a leper asked Jesus to heal him and
Jesus "angrily put forth [his] hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou
clean." In our modern Bibles, the word "angrily" is strangely
absent.

Luke 22:44 in Codex Sinaiticus and
our modern Bibles claim that an angel appeared before Jesus, strengthening
him. In Codex Vaticanus, this angel is strangely absent. If Jesus was the "Son
of God" then obviously it would be highly inappropriate for him to need an
angel to strengthen him. This verse, then, must have been a scribal mistake.
Right?

The alleged words of Jesus on the cross
"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do" (Luke 23:34)
were originally present in the Codex Sinaiticus but was later erased from the
text by another editor. Bearing in mind how the Church regarded and treated
the Jews in the middle ages, can we think of any reason why this verse might
have stood in the way of official Church policy and their
"inquisitions"?

John 5:4 is missing from Codex
Sinaiticus.

In Mark chapter 9, the words "Where
their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched." are again
missing.

In Matt. 5:22, the words "without cause" are
missing in both the codex Vaticanus and Sinaiticus.

Matt. 21:7
in our modern Bibles reads "And [the disciples] brought the ass, and the
colt, and put on them their clothes, and they set [Jesus] thereon." In the
original manuscripts, this verse read "and they set [Jesus] upon them,"
However, the picture of Jesus being placed upon two animals at the same time
and being asked to ride them at once was objectionable to some, so this verse
was changed to "and they set [Jesus] upon him" (which "him"?). Soon after, the
English translation completely avoided this problem by translating it as
"thereon."

In Mark 6:11, our modern Bibles
contain the words "Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom
and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city." However, these words
are not to be found in either of these two most ancient of Christian Biblical
manuscripts, having been introduced into the text centuries
later.

The words of Matthew 6:13 "For
thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever." are not to be
found in these two most ancient manuscripts as well as many others. The
parallel passages in Luke are also defective.

Matthew 27:35 in our modern Bibles
contains the words "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the
prophet, They parted my garments among them, and upon my vesture did they cast
lots." This passage, once again, is not found according to Rev. Merrill in any
Biblical uncial manuscript dating before the ninth century.

1 Timothy 3:16 originally read "And
without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: which was manifest in
the flesh.." This was then later (as seen previously), ever so subtly changed
to "And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was
manifest in the flesh…." Thus, the doctrine of the "incarnation" was
born.

"Ye shall not add unto the word which I
command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the
commandments of the LORD your God." Deuteronomy 4:2

Adi ibn Hatim al-Tai'i was a Christian who
embraced Islam during the time of Muhammad (pbuh). One day, verse of the
Qur'an, Al-Tawba(9):30-31 was recited before him: "And the Jews said: Ezra is the son Allah, and the Christians
said: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their own]
mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah's curse
be upon them. How deluded are they! They took their rabbis and their monks as
lords besides Allah, and the Messiah son of Mary, but they were not commanded
but to worship One God. There is no God but Him. Be He Glorified from all that
they associate with Him!" When Adi heard this verse, he commented: "O
messenger of Allah, we did not worship them." The prophet Muhammad (pbuh)
replied: "Did they not make matters lawful and unlawful for you?" (He was
referring to the power the monks and Rabbis gave themselves because of their
claimed divine inspiration to change laws and regulations). Adi replied "Yes,
they did!". Muhammad (pbuh) said: "That, then, is the worshipping of them in
association with Allah."

If we were to ask a Christian layman:
"Where did the Bible in your hands come from?," they would more than likely
tell us "from God!"

If you were now to ask him: "How do you
know it is from God?

He will reply, "He inspired it to many
people who then wrote it down and preserved it for us."

If we now ask: "Are all of these inspired
people prophets?"

He will answer: "No, they include both
prophets and other faultless 'saints', etc.."

"So these prophets and 'saints' signed
their names to these documents?" we would ask.

They would respond
No. But the Church knows who wrote them, and when they were written, and has
irrefutable proof regarding this matter."

If we were to now ask: "would it be
possible for any unscrupulous person who had access to the Bible in the past
to modify it's books?"

They would reply: "Of course not! The
church has told us that even the much older Old Testament was preserved with
such diligent guardianship that they even counted and recorded every single
word and every single letter in it. Thus, the church has justly reassured us
that these words never have, and never could be, changed by mankind, even by
scribal error or by accident."

"Let us now ask a different question" we
would continue. "Are the 'New and Old Testaments' in your hands today the same
"New and Old Testaments" available to the apostles of Jesus (pbuh) till the
present day?" They would answer "Of course! There has always been only one
Bible!"

This is the general gist of any such
conversation that is held between a Muslim and a Christian layman regarding
their Bible, its composition and preservation. However, if we were to ask
their SCHOLARS the same set of questions we would be amazed to find a
tremendous chasm in the responses supplied by the Christian laypeople as
compared to their own Christian scholars.

If we were to go to a
Western library and look up the history of the Bible as recorded by their own
eminent Christian scholars throughout the ages, we would find that they tell
us that the books of the "New Testament" in our possession today were not
officially approved into the New Testament "canon" of "inspired" books until
many centuries after the departure of Jesus. Tens of generations of
Christians literally lived and died after the departure of Jesus (pbuh)
neverhaving known nor seen
such a "New Testament" or "Bible" as the one in our possession
today.

After the departure of Jesus (pbuh), the
apostles and many other people began to write "gospels." Each one of these
authors would travel to other lands and be followed by a number of people who
would adopt this man's gospel as his "Bible." Now, even the unscrupulous began
to write "gospels" and to claim they were from a given apostle or that they
themselves were receiving divine inspiration. Many new and innovative
teachings began now to be introduced into the religion of Jesus (pbuh).
Enmity, hatred and war began to break out between these groups. Each person
claimed that they alone held the "true" Gospel of Jesus (pbuh) and no one
else. Their beliefs now ran the gamut, from those who believed Jesus (pbuh) to
be a mortal messenger of God and nothing more, to those who claimed partial
divinity for Jesus (pbuh), to those who claimed Jesus (pbuh) to be a true god,
but independent of God himself, to those who called for a "Trinity," to those
who claimed that Mary (pbuh) too was a god, to those who believed in two gods,
one good and the other evil. This is when the war of the gospels
began.

Everyone now cursed and damned everyone
else. Christian sects butchered one-another right and left. There were more
great debates and councils than you could shake a stick at. However, none of
these groups had sufficient might to totally dominate and silence the others
for good. They needed an undefeatable ally, so they began to look to the Roman
empire for support. The Roman empire was a pagan empire, however, it was the
dominant "superpower" of the time. Anyone who could enlist it's aid would have
an unconquerable ally at their side and would themselves be undefeatable. On
the Roman side, Emperor Constantine was greatly troubled by the swelling ranks
of his Christian subjects and the great division among their ranks which did
not bode well for the continued stability of his empire.

Most of these fringe sects now began to
fade into insignificance and the matter was now left between those who
believed in the Unity of God and those who believed in a "Trinity." The Roman
empire's support fluctuated between these two groups for a long time until the
Trinitarian's finally gained the upper hand and all but wiped the Unitarians
off the face of the earth. They selected and collected the "truly inspired"
gospels into one volume which later became the "New Testament." They burned
all other gospels. Many sweeping campaigns if "Inquisition" were launched.
Everyone found possessing any of these "false" Gospels was put to death and
his Gospel burned.

This state of affairs continued for many
centuries and many people were convicted of heresy and burned to death at the
stake for a great variety of reasons. Yet others had their land and property
confiscated and were imprisoned. Physical torture was casually used in order
to extract a confession of guilt which would then be used to justify a verdict
of death by burning. Some of the methods used to extract a confession of guilt
were the stretching of limbs on the rack, burning with live coals, and the
strappado (a vertical rack).

Denial of the charges without
counterproof or refusal to confess resulted in the most severe punishments
such as life imprisonment or execution and total confiscation of property. The
number of those who fell victim to these inquisitions are far to numerous to
list here. Examples of these people include the philosopher Giordano Bruno,
Galileo, Joan of Arc, and the religious order of knights called the
Templars among countless hundreds of thousands of others.

If
the Trinitarians did not have the power to burn these people at the stake
during their lifetime, then they would exhume their bodies after their death
and burn them after their death (e.g. John Wycliffe).

In the
end, over twelve million people were put to death by the Church
inquisitions (Apology for Muhammad and the Qur'an, John
Davenport).

The inquisitions reached their height
around the middle of the fifteenth century in a massive and vicious
persecution campaign the major targets of which were the Marranos (converts
from Judaism) and Moriscos (converts from Islam), many of whom were suspected
of secretly adhering to their original faiths. When things began to quiet down
a little, the victor's historians and philosophers wrote their history books
explaining how they managed to overcome the wicked, to defeat the blasphemers,
and to burn the devils, sorcerers, and witches at the stake. These are the
books which have had the greatest influence on the Western history books we
have in our hands today.

Whenever a scholar of Christianity
would stumble upon the truth and begin to write about it his works would
invariably be destroyed (e.g. Sir Isaac Newton, the 16th century Spaniard
Michael Servetus, etc.). In all cases, it was recognized that there was no
need to disprove the author's evidence or refute it, rather, it was sufficient
to muzzle the opposition, burn their books, extract a confession from them
under duress, and expel them from society or kill them.

Even the Popes themselves would
sometimes recognize the falsehood of the "Trinity" and the fact that it was a
later fabrication of mankind. One of these popes, Honorius, was officially
cursed forty eight years after his death by the Synod which was held in
Istanbul in 680 C.E.

Sometimes it is an individual's own
silence which proves to be the most deafening proclamation. As we saw in
the previous chapters, for the period of a century and more the only
"Scriptures" used by the first Jewish followers of Jesus were the Greek
Septuagint translations (commonly designated LXX) of the Hebrew Old Testament,
"the Law and the Prophets", supplemented by various Jewish apocrypha and the
Sibylline Oracles (150 BC to AD 180); these were the only "authorities"
appealed to by the early "Church Fathers" when preaching their new faith.
Nowhere do they quote the books which we know today as the "New
Testament."

Naturally, if the "history" of the
Trinitarian Church regarding their chosen Gospels and what are claimed to be
the inspired writings of Jesus' first Apostles were true, and these writings
had indeed been accepted as authoritative at that time, then they would have
been the most precious and potent documents of preaching for their doctrine.
Undoubtedly, they would have spoken of nothing else, but would have quoted
them and appealed to their authority at every turn as they have been doing
through the centuries since. But, for some 150 years, little or nothing
besides the Old Testament and these Oracles were known or quoted. As said by
the great critic, Solomon Reinach, "With the exception of Papias, who
speaks of a narrative by Mark, and a collection of sayings
ofJesus, no
Christian writer of the first half of the second century (i.e., up to 150
C.E.) quotes theGospels or their reputed authors."Orpheus, Reinach, p.
218

But let us back up a little and study how
and when the "inspired" books of the Bible were incorporated into the
Christian "canon" of the Bible. We have already given a brief introduction in
section 1.2.5 onwards of how the current Gospels of the Bible were introduced
as "authentic." Let us now have a very brief look at some of the details. The
following was obtained from the book "Izhar ul Haqq" among other
references:

In the city of Nicea (modern: Iznik,
Turkey), in the year 325 AD, a great conference of Christian theologians and
religious scholars was convened under the order of the Emperor
Constantine to examine and define the status of these countless Christian
Gospels. After a thorough investigation it was decided that the Epistle of
Jude was genuine and believable. The rest of our current books of the
Bible were declared doubtful. This was explicitly mentioned by Saint Jerome in
the introduction to his book. St. Jerome, of course, was a Christian scholar
and a great philosopher. He was born in 340 AD He translated the Bible into
Latin. He was a famous bibliographer and wrote many books on the
Bible.

Before the year 325 C.E., it is known that the Gospel
of Barnabas was accepted as canonical in the churches of Alexandria. It is
known to have been circulated in the first two centuries after Christ (pbuh)
from the writings of Irenaeus (130-200AD). After this council, four Gospels
were selected out of a minimum of three hundred available and the rest,
including the Gospel of Barnabas, were ordered utterly destroyed. All Gospels
written in Hebrew were also ordered destroyed.

In the year 364 AD, another council was
held in Laodicea for the same purpose. This conference of Christian scholars
and theologians not only confirmed the decision of the council of Nicea
regarding the authenticity of the Epistle of Jude but also declared
that the following six books must also be added to the list of genuine and
believable books: The Book of Esther, The Epistle Of James, The Second
Epistle of Peter, The Second and Third Epistles of John, The Epistle of Paul
to the Hebrews. This conference pronounced their decision to the public.
The book of Revelations, however, remained out of the list of the acknowledged
books in both the councils.

In 397 another great conference was held
called the Council of Carthage. Augustine, the celebrated Christian scholar,
was among the one hundred and twenty six learned participants. The members of
this council confirmed the decisions of the two previous Councils and also
added the following books to the list of the divine books: The Book of the
Songs of Solomon, The Book of Tobit, The Book of Baruch, Ecclesiasticus, and
The First and Second Books of Maccabees.

At the same time the members of this
council decided that the book of Baruch was a part of the book of
Jeremiah because Baruch was the deputy of Jeremiah. Therefore they did not
include the name of this book separately in the list.

Three more conferences were held after
this in Trullo, Florence and Trent (1545-63). The members of these meetings
confirmed the decision of the Council of Carthage. The last two councils,
however, wrote the name of the book of Baruch separately.

After these councils nearly all the books
which had previously been doubtful among Christians were now included in the
list of acknowledged books.

The status of these books remained
unchanged until the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century. The
Protestants repudiated the decisions of the councils and declared that there
are only 66 truly "inspired" books of God, and not 73 as claimed by the
Catholics.

The following books were to be rejected: The
Book of Baruch, The Book of Tobit, The Letter of Jude, The Songs of Solomon,
Ecclesiasticus, and The First and Second Books of Maccabees. They excluded
these books from the list of acknowledged books.

The Protestants also rejected the
decision of their forbears regarding some chapters of the book of Esther.
This book consists of 16 chapters. They decided that the first nine chapters
and three verses from chapter ten were to be rejected.

They
based their decision on the following six reasons:

1. These works were considered
to be false even in the original Hebrew and Chaldaean languages which were
no longer available.

2. The Jews did not acknowledge them as
revealed books.

3. All the Christians have not
acknowledged them as believable.

4. Jerome said that these books were not
reliable and were insufficient to prove and support the doctrines of the
faith.

5. Klaus has openly said that these
books were recited but not in every place.

6. Eusebius specifically said in section
22 of his fourth book that these books have been tampered with, and changed.
In particular the Second Book of
Maccabees.

It now becomes apparent that books
which had been lost in the original and which only existed in translation
were erroneously acknowledged by thousands of theologians as divine
revelation. This state of affairs leads a non-Christian reader to distrust the
unanimous decisions of Christian scholars of both the Catholic and the
Protestant persuasions. The followers of Catholic faith still believe in these
books in blind pursuance of their forebears.

It is a prerequisite of believing in a
certain book as divinely revealed that it is proved through infallible
arguments that the book in question was revealed through a prophet and that it
has been conveyed to us precisely in the same order without any change through
an uninterrupted chain of narrators. It is not at all sufficient to attribute
a book to a certain prophet on the basis of suppositions and conjectures.
Unsupported assertions made by one or a few sects of people should not be, and
cannot be, accepted in this connection.

We have already seen how Catholic and
Protestant scholars differ on the question of the authenticity of some of
these books.

There are yet more books of the Bible which have
been rejected by Christians. They include the Book of Revelation, the Book
of Genesis, the Book of Ascension, the Book of Mysteries, the Book of
Testament and the Book of Confession which are all ascribed to the Prophet
Moses. Similarly a fourth Book of Ezra is claimed to be from the Prophet Ezra
and a book concerning Isaiah's ascension and revelation are ascribed to
him.

In addition to the known book of Jeremiah, there is another
book attributed to him. There are numerous sayings which are claimed to be
from the Prophet Habakkuk. There are many songs which are said to be from the
Prophet Solomon. There are more than 70 books, other than the present ones,
of the new Testament, which are ascribed to Jesus, Mary, the apostles, and
their disciples.

In this day and age, some Christian scholars
are even making the case for the authenticity of the Gospel of Thomas as the
"fifth" Gospel (see "The Five Gospels," written over six years by 24 Christian
scholars from some of the USA and Canada's most prestigious
universities)

The Christians of this age have claimed
that these books are false and forgeries. The Greek Church, Catholic church
and the Protestant Church are unanimous on this point. Similarly the Greek
Church claims that the third book of Ezra is a part of the Old Testament and
believes it to have been written by the Prophet Ezra while the Protestant and
Catholic Churches have declared it false and fabricated.

Groliers encyclopedia says under the
heading "New Testament, canon": "The process by which
the canon of the New Testament was formed began in the 2d century, probably
with a collection of ten letters of Paul. Toward the end of that century,
Irenaeus argued for the unique authority of the portion of the Canon called
the Gospels. Acceptance of the other books came gradually. The church in Egypt
used more than the present 27 books, and the Syriac-speaking churches fewer.
The question of an official canon became urgent during the 4th century. It was
mainly through the influence of Athanasius, bishop of Alexandria, and because
Jerome included the 27 books in his Latin version of the Bible called the
Vulgate, that the present canon came to be
accepted.."

Notice how the writings of Paul were the
first to be accepted by the Trinitarian church. All other gospels were then
either accepted or destroyed based upon their conformance to the teachings of
Paul.

As mentioned previously, Lobegott
Friedrich Konstantin Von Tischendorf was one of the most eminent
conservative Biblical scholars of the nineteenth century. One of his greatest
lifelong achievements was his discovery of one of the oldest known Biblical
manuscripts know to mankind, the "Codex Sinaiticus," with the monks of Saint
Catherine's Monasteryin Mount Sinai. In this oldest known copy of the Bible
known to humanity we find contained two gospels which would later be discarded
by a more enlightened generation.

They are "The Epistle of Barnabas" (not to
be confused with the Gospel of Barnabas), and "The Shepherd of Hermas." Today,
of course, neither of these two books is to be found in our modern
Bibles. As also seen in section 1.2, many later "insertions" of the church
were exposed through the study of this manuscript. However, following in the
tradition of true conservative Christian scholars before him, Tischendorf
managed to apply 12,000 "corrections" to this manuscript's 110,000 lines
before he was through "transcribing" it (see "Secrets of Mount Sinai",
James Bentley, Doubleday, NY, 1986, p. 95)

We have already seen in chapter one how
"St. Paul" all but totally obliterated the religion of Jesus (pbuh)
based upon the authority of his alleged "visions". We then saw how his
teachings were based more upon his personal philosophy and beliefs than any
attempt to cite words or actions of Jesus (pbuh) himself (e.g. Galatians
2).

We further saw how his followers slaughtered all
Christians who would not forsake the teachings of the apostles for his
teachings and how he was later made the "majority author" of the Bible and
countless authentic gospels were burned and labeled apocrypha by his
followers.

"All the evidence indicates that the
words of Jesus were authoritative in the Church from the first, and this makes
it the more remarkable that such scanty attention is paid to the words or
works of Jesus in the earliest Christian writings, Paul's letters, the later
Epistles, Hebrews, Revelation, and even Acts have little to report about
them... Papias (ca. AD 130), the first person to actually name a written
gospel, illustrates the point. Even though he defends Mark's gospel (Euseb.
Hist. III.xxxix.15-16), and had himself appended a collection of Jesus
tradition to his 'Interpretation of the Oracles of the Lord' (Euseb. Hist.
III.xxxix.2-3), his own clear preference was for the oral tradition concerning
Jesus, and the glimpses that Eusebius provides of Papias' Jesus tradition give
no hint of his dependence on Mark. Neither do the more frequent citations of
Jesus in the APOSTOLIC FATHERS, largely 'synoptic' in character show much
dependence on our written gospels" in The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible, Supplementary
Volume, p. 137

The Interpreter's Dictionary of the Bible
contains much more revealing information in this regard, far too much to
reproduce here. The reader is strongly encouraged to locate a copy in their
local library and read the details.

The popularly accepted dates for the
authorship of the current books of the Bible are approximately as
follows:

Approx. AD Event /
Document

30 Crucifixion (Ascension) of
Jesus

50 First Epistle of
Paul

62 Last Epistle of Paul

65-70 Mark's Gospel

70 Epistle to Hebrews

80 Luke's Gospel

85-90 Matthew's Gospel

90 Acts

90-100 John's Gospel and First
Epistle

95-100 Revelation

100 I & II Timothy and
Titus

Uncertainty about James I & II, Peter,
John and Jude does not allow historians to estimate their origin dates. (See
"The Early Church And The New Testament," Irene Allen,
1953).

We begin to see the degree to which our current religion
of "Christianity" is based more on the teachings and writings of Paul
than anything else. The Gospels which are popularly believed to have been
written first were in actuality written long after the writings of Paul. Now
Christian scholars are even beginning to uncover extensive evidence that these
Gospels were not even written by their claimed authors.

The more
Christian scholars study the Bible, the more it becomes painfully apparent
that what is popularly referred to today as "Christianity" should more
appropriately be named "Paulanity."

Even when a book is claimed to be truly
"inspired" we still find that the Church cannot say with 100% assuredness who
wrote this "inspired" book. As mentioned there, the authors of the RSV
Bible by Collins say that the author of "Kings" is "Unknown," the book of
Isaiah is "Mainly credited to Isaiah. Parts may have been written by
others."

Ecclesiastics: "Author. Doubtful, but
commonly assigned to Solomon."

Ruth: "Author. Not definitely
known, perhaps Samuel." and on and on.

Is this how a truly
unbiased mind defines "inspired by God"? You be the
judge.

"Verily, those who
conceal that which Allah has sent down of the Book and purchase a small gain
therewith, they eat into their bellies nothing but fire. Allah will not speak
to them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them, and theirs will
be a painful torment. Those are they who purchase error at the price of
guidance, and torment at the price of pardon. What boldness (they show) for
the Fire!" The noble Qur'an,
Al-Baqarah(2):174-175